Projector vs large TV - Bang for buck
- Thread starter Yucca
- Start date
You've had 5 pages with multiple people explaining why your projector is not a true 4k projector.
The fact is 4K is 8.1 million pixels
Your projector has 4.1 million pixels, w.
Your projector is based on a non standard chip size with 4.1 million pixels which when then offset by half a pixel gives a theoretical resolution of 4k.
It certainly is a sharper higher resolution displayed picture, but it is not true 4k. It will never display a 1:1 pixel mapped checker board.
An image and indeed the UHD standard is about far more than just resolution. Contrary to what you've said it will be abundantly clear to anyone that does the slightest bit of research that the UHD 60 does not support REC2020 wide colour gamut, its implementation of HDR is poor any anything but picture modes far outside or reference and its black levels are poor.
The UHD 60 is a great budget projector... but your claim was that could buy a 'great' 4k HDR projector. Unfortunately thats just not the case as its not true 4k and its HDR performance is poor..... but then you've had 5 pages of different people telling you that.
More misinformation. It does display the 4k 1:1 pixel mapped checker board correctly and cleanly and if you don't believe me search the reviews that tested it. The ultimate test is a 4k 1-pixel line test pattern which contains alternating black and white lines that are each one pixel wide. Like the checker board each line is clean and clearly defined, and you see distinct pixel definition when examining it up close. No native 4K projector can do any better as its identical, so it is a true 4k projector as it correctly pass's all the 4k test patterns.
Each discrete pixels is on screen and all the 4k test patterns I know about have been resolved correctly, clearly and sharply. So while its colours, contrast and blacks are not as good as triple price projectors for the 4k element its excellent. The overall image while not as good as the triple price projector is still excellent which is why it won so many awards.
Sorry I really shouldn’t have responded more so after I said I wouldn't but I felt like I had to defend myself when vile said I was misleading people about 4k when I wasn't. I will do my best to keep away from this thread for 3 or 4 days. Not even going read it over the weekend so I do not get tempted to respond again.
As usual Potty continues to respond with more lies.
Its inherently impossible for it to pixel map a UHD video signal - the chip only has half the pixels of a UHD signal - it has to display half of them, shift and then flash the other half.
Never mind 'triple priced projectors' its Colour Contrast and Blacks are inferior to the NON Native e shift 4k projectors on the market - a JVC or a decent Epson will give you superior blacks HDR that actuals works in a reference setting and will actually have a wife colour gamut which is part of the UHD standard.
You can lie to yourself all you want but thats not pixel mapping and its not native 4k.
Here is a link to a book that explains the very briefly used DLP technology is early Rear projection sets - each pixel on the chip shifted flashing 2 pixels onto the screen to create a 1080p image.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...e&q=DLP rear projection resolution ti&f=false
We can call it not a native 4k Projector and move on.
Ha ha ha. I agree.
That’s irrelevant as the projector doesn’t use that method or have the same limitations as that method. You keep lying and saying “exactly the same method” but saying that over and over doesn’t make it true. If it’s the same method how come it can display a native 4K resolution and pass all the native 4k test patterns correctly? When that method cannot.
Do you realize that your lies and calling me names only discredits your point? It’s easy to prove I am telling the truth and all you have done is misled people, told multiply lies and called me names.
Anyone can get hold of a 4k test pattern, ring up a local projector company like Richer Sounds and ask for a demo, they even do home demos in a lot of areas. If it’s so inherently impossible how come all the demo rooms and home demos do what I say? This proves what you said is a lie and that it can really display a native 4K resolution.
The other way to prove what I said is true is to read the reviews and what reliable places like projectorcentral.com said. “The ultimate test of this is the display of a 4K resolution 1-pixel line test pattern which contains alternating black and white lines that are each one pixel wide. When viewing this test pattern on a projector using the 4K DLP chip, each line is clean and clearly defined, and you see distinct pixel definition when examining it up close. It is not possible to achieve this level of precision using the pixel shift technology with standard HD 1080p chips.
Therefore, despite the fact that the 4K DLP chip itself has 4.15 million mirrors instead of 8.3 million, we have no problem categorizing the 4K projectors using this chip as native 4K resolution based on the fact that they can display a clean 1-pixel line test pattern. No native 4K projector can do any better. Practically speaking, the number of mirrors on the chip is irrelevant if it can put 8.3 million discrete pixels on the screen and fully resolve a 4K 1-pixel line pattern.”
There are dozens of YouTube video reviews confirming what I said some of which even run projectors side by side.
Lastly while the vpl-vw365es does have better blacks, colors and contrast these photos prove the UHD65 is displaying the full native 4k image and is not that poor at backs.
https://tvspro-816a.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/color.jpg
https://tvspro-816a.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Overall.jpg
We can call it a native 4K resolution and move on as that is what it displays.
How is it different? One used half resolution chip flashing twice for 1080p and the current uses a half resolution chip flashing twice for UHD.
1:1 Pixel mapping is when is when the Projector is when display is given 1 pixel of the image to one pixel of the display device. The DLP XPR chips are
2716 x 1528, they inherently cant pixel map a UHD image as the chip cannot display the full image.
It will also never be Native 4k
https://www.avforums.com/review/acer-v7850-4k-dlp-projector-review.13830
"not a native 4K projector"
https://www.avforums.com/review/acer-v9800-4k-dlp-projector-review.13706
"Yes, it’s not native"
https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/21/optomas-uhd60-projector-delivers-great-affordable-4k-performance/
"you’ll never know you’re not looking at a true 4K image"
https://www.projectorreviews.com/optoma/optoma-uhd65-4k-home-theater-projector-review/
Don’t fall, however for the 4K UHD hype. Manufacturers tend to want to let readers “assume” it’s true 4K,
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/dlps-4k-really-4k
"despite the lower native resolution on the DMD and its inability to deliver all the pixels of an Ultra HD frame at one time."
Did you ever consider working as the Iraqi information minister?
So despite it doing what you say is impossible you are going to keep insisting it’s impossible instead of admitting you are wrong. If the projector cannot inherently do this then I want to see your explanation of why so many reviews can and why the real world tests in the projectors shops can. Clearly you are wrong and the full image is displayed and test patterns are displayed correctly.
There is more to the technique then just flashing twice. It has independent single-pixel structures to present two discrete pixels for each mirror. So you get the full 4k discrete pixels resolution.
The method you are talking about cannot display the full image and cannot pass the 4k test patterns. The UHD65 can display the full image and can pass the 4k test patterns. Although it’s not a native 4k chip it can display a full correct 4k resolution with full discrete pixels. I am going to stick to what the reliable sources say and what the real world tests show over your proven lies.
Also of note from your link when that reviewer said “but typically fail to remind us that the size of their pixels is double the area of true 4K pixels, and you just can’t get as sharp an image when the pixels are relatively “huge.” You should really use reliable sources as that was 100% proven false. A bunch of people wrote fake reviews before the projector came out. They assumed it used the same method as the JVC and Epson units which turned out to be false after reliable reviewers got hold of final units and consumers got hold of finial units. It’s not the same shifting technique as JVC and Epson. The method you talked about created double sized pixels in the other projectors but the UHD are not double size but the correct 4k size as proven in the video link I gave you last week. More evidence that its not the same method.
From that full review in that last link you gave “This differs from the similar shifting technique that JVC and Epson use in their LCOS and LCD “4K” projectors.
But, its ability to hit that 8 million pixel threshold is what officially qualifies it as a 4K display by the Consumer Technology Association.”
So it’s an officially qualified 4k display as it can display a full 4k resolution. The shifting technique on the JVC and Epson 4k projectors are not officially qualified as they do not display a full 4k resolution. Also as per that link it differs from the shifting technique that JVC and Epson use as I have been saying all along.
Nice attempt at deflection. You’re the one that has ignored all the photos, evidence and links and instead of valid counter points you post this instead. Did you even look at the photo links or YouTube video I have posted? Or did you just ignore them as you know they prove you wrong?
No its really not complicated the chip doesn't have enough pixels to have show the full UHD resolution, so it cant 1:1pixel map.
This means its not native 4K
The chip is half the resolution of UHD and is using pixel shifting to output it imagine. (Just like DLP tvs with half resolution chips used to make HD)
This means its not Native 4k
Anyone with a basic grasp of the technology can see its using a compromise to make its picture that is driven by budget, all the reviews i quoted where independent reviews and not people trying to sell the projector.
No one agrees with you on this thread.
So are you just drivelling on and on because you need to lie to yourself and others on this forum or do you just lack the ability to grasp basic concepts?
Enjoy your projector... no one here thinks its native 4k.
This means its not native 4K
The chip is half the resolution of UHD and is using pixel shifting to output it imagine. (Just like DLP tvs with half resolution chips used to make HD)
This means its not Native 4k
Anyone with a basic grasp of the technology can see its using a compromise to make its picture that is driven by budget, all the reviews i quoted where independent reviews and not people trying to sell the projector.
No one agrees with you on this thread.
So are you just drivelling on and on because you need to lie to yourself and others on this forum or do you just lack the ability to grasp basic concepts?
Enjoy your projector... no one here thinks its native 4k.
That a flat out lie and you know it is. But that’s what I have come to expect from you as you have been caught out lying throughout this thread. It does display the full 8 million discrete pixels for the full UHD resolution and it can display the 1:1 pixel mapped 4k test patterns as confirmed by multiply independent people. Also confirmed by end consumers with the product and as I pointed out before, anyone reading this thread can test for themselves via Richer Sounds and see you lied.
Why do you keep ignoring those key facts? Those facts have been proven true. It was even officially qualified by the Consumer Technology Association which defines the 4k standard. So you are not just arguing against me but them as well. But apparently you seem to think you know more than the Consumer Technology Association the main force behind 4k.
Why is it so hard for you to understand it’s not the same pixel shifting method as the DLP TVs or the same as the JVC and Epson projectors? Its not just like the DLP TV's. It’s similar in some ways but not the same and doesn’t have the same limitations. There is a reason why the UHD65 is officially qualified via the CTA group and the JVC and Epson projectors are not. Why do you keep insisting the UHD65 is the same pixel shifting method as the TV's, JVC and Epson when it’s perfectly clear it’s not the same method and doesn’t have the same limitations?
Why do you keep lumping all the pixel shifting together when they are different methods with different limitations. The JVC and Epson pixel shift and do not display the full UHD resolution. The UHD65 works with a different method that does display the full UHD resolution. Hence why it can run the text patterns correctly with a 1:1pixel map.
The only person driveling on nonsense and lying to themselves is you. For some reason you cannot grasp your understanding is wrong and what you say is impossible is in fact possible. You have ignored fact after fact that proves you wrong all so you don’t have to admit to being wrong.
You have been caught out lying multiple times now so I am not wasting any more time with you.
Anyone with the ability to add up can see it doesnt have enough pixels for its chip to pixel map the image. The chip has to display the image in two separate instances - thats not native 4k.
I'm not 'lumping all pixel shifting projectors together.' The XPR chips have a higher resolution than the Epson or JVC chips, but its still not a UHD chip and that still doesnt make it native 4k.
I won't hold my breath with the way you flip flop trying to make up your non explanations.. See you next tuesday?
Ignoring any other variables and whether its the case or not here - if its fast enough and the pixels are discrete enough it doesn't matter - most display technologies in existence don't render all the pixels instantly.
Oh i totally accept that from a resolution only point of view the XPR chips achieve a result that is indistinguishable to most viewers in real world conditions if you compared it 'just' to the resolution of a 4k Sony.
The XPR chip relying on visual processing, pixel shifting and image persistence to achieve what it does- that doesn't make it native 4k.
I doubt most people can tell the difference from a purely resolution point of view from the Sony's to the JVC's.
4k isn't marketed to the public as 'just' a resolution and We also don't live in world without other variables - we're debating the statement that..
In real world use a user will notice a lack of wide colour gamut, rainbow effect, poor reference settings for HDR and poor black levels. I certainly noticed these when i viewed it.
Black levels on Optomas are a bit of a sticking point for me as while out the box they aren't always great I've so far always managed to get something competitive to any other projector when I have full control of the variables. One reason though why I'd maybe not recommend using other brand projectors that use the same chips and software but don't always have all the calibration features, etc. which are necessary to get best results.